Something to think about.......Called "MMO", the games we play are designed for interdependenc
e with other players. In our latest Social Hub, we take a look at how player choice may have led to a decline in that interdependenc
e.
Column By Christina Gonzalez on December 09, 2013It's not you, it's me. I can gather enough raw materials from every corner of the world, change my class if I need to better protect against the creatures I'm going up against, and even use a whole set of other skills to get through a tough task set before me. I...just don't need you anymore. In many of today's MMOs, the buzzwords are “player choice”, and in giving players lots of choices, an abundance of skills, and the ability to solo nearly everything, there are tradeoffs. In creating games centered around the player and having endless choices to play “your way”, those tradeoffs can be both harmful to community but financially lucrative for studios. Where has interdependenc
e gone? The way of player choice.
Once upon a time, a popular consideration was whether or not your chosen server would have a good community (at launch or if you joined up later). Would there be a healthy population over time? Would there be helpful, skilled players to team up with? Would there be a good class distribution ratio? And for some, whether there would be active roleplayers (or RP servers). Classes and gameplay and choice were all important, as they are now, but somehow it seems like for myself and most people I know that have played MMOs for a while, the mindset of planning was with a more group-oriented mind. You didn't want to roll on a server with a severe imbalance of, say, mages, making groups hard to find. Nor would you want your home server to have just a handful of crafters.
Designers too knew that there was potential for wildly uneven numbers at times, but communities sprung up and often took care of themselves. That's not a rose-colored glasses statement, as having to reroll a character was more painful then, so knowing the community composition and being able to settle into your groove mattered.
Nowadays we have gained more flexibility, which is a good thing. We're able to decide how to play and get in our time without needing to wait around for say, a doctor to buff someone, or the players of one class or race that can gather materials to be online in enough numbers for the groups that need them. Class flexibility isn't recent (one of my favorite implementation
s actually came in The Matrix Online, where you could actually load up any skill in the game as long as you had unlocked them and had copies), but the whole process has become streamlined in such a way that saves us time and lets us get right into the game. We can also change classes according to our needs or simply tweak our progression. Games like Rift offer this sort of flexibility, and The Elder Scrolls Online looks to head in that direction as well. Final Fantasy XIV: A Realm Reborn is perhaps the best recent example of this kind of system at work. You can learn on the same character and keep progressing.
Is it any surprise that our MMO circles have seemingly tightened? The more self-reliant we are in these games, the less we need others. That's not to say some games aren't carrying elements of interdependenc
e. Camelot Unchained will have items be crafted, so you had better get friendly with the other classes. However, CU is a PvP-centered game, so it's unlikely there will be a huge open world where this takes place. The Elder Scrolls Online will let players distribute crafting points so as to either master two or spread points across five disciplines. This system looks to let a few players be masters in their chosen profession, hopefully leading to those crafters mattering when it comes to supply of high-level crafted items. Yet with all five paths accessible to players, depending on (that word again) choice, this system goes only partway toward creating an interdependent system. Add in some people's issues with the games that tweak or throw out traditional trinity gameplay, and it's easy to understand why some feel a disconnection.
The new player-centered systems also seem to leave the door more open to microtransacti
ons, because everything becomes about the individual experience. Customization was possible in the past (the good dyes sold for a pretty sum in older games, and guild emblems on shields and the like were a big deal), but all of this was secondary. Now it's a touted, promoted feature and isn't always for in-game currency. Getting people to buy requires they be emotionally invested on some level with what their characters look like, what's in their homes, and other indicators of personality and status. It's marketed as choice, but it's an encouraged egocentrism.
Many of the earlier MMOs had built-in downtime for multiple reasons. It kept people playing longer. Technological limitations. It made the world feel larger. But for whatever reasons existed, it helped generate a sense of community that is somewhat lost in today's “player choice” driven games. I remember time spent dedicated to crafting during which my guildmates and I spent time socializing via chat and voice. We'd also talk to those who came to craft at the hub as well. Downtime bores a lot of people though, so it has been significantly reduced over time. I think systems like dungeon finders are beneficial, even with the tradeoff, but I suppose it comes down to the fact each player has his or her own vision of what the right balance should look like. That is not to say that some of today's games aren't fun or entertaining to play through. But when you create systems that are fully contained, or fully contained between the player and the cash shop, you take away something else.
The abovementioned downtime is necessary to note because many people bonded in downtime, or in learning the systems that caused many to be valuable to one another. If only one class has a certain spell or if another class can give players a certain buff that makes a quest doable, that makes it important not just to interact with one another, but to even develop relationships with your fellow players. That's one difference between playing in the same place together and playing together.
Yes, many of the players that have come to MMOs in the last 5-8 years have broadened the player base and, coupled with an aging average age for MMO players, led to some changes. This is a story many of us that have been around a while have heard a million times. Naturally, marketers have followed and the shift away from subscriptions has arguably devalued social and community importance. It's all about the player now, inside the bubble of self-importance and choice.
That said, as I have argued before in this space, it's also
up to the players to create and invest in the community if they want to see things be better. Get out there and talk to someone and even ask for help, offer help, buff the next ten people who pass you. It's not the return of full-fledged interdependenc e, but it can bring some light to the day.*
http://www.mmorpg.com/showFeature.cfm/loadFeature/8021/page/1*
emphasis mineSo. Watchers, what do you think?
